OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR vs . JUDGE FLORENTINO V. FLORO, JR.

Facts:

 This case is made up of three consolidated cases concerning the ability of Judge Floro to serve as
a judge due to mental illness.
 In the First Case, Atty. Florentino Floro first applied for judgeship in 1995 but later withdrew his
application due to an unfavorable psychological evaluation revealing evidence of ego
disintegration and developing psychotic process. He applied again after 3 years but was evaluated
as unfit to be a judge due to his psychological evaluation that exposed more problems.
 However, because of his impressive academic background, the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC)
allowed Atty. Floro to seek a second opinion from private practitioners. The second opinion
appeared to be favorable paving the way for Atty. Floro to be appointed as a RTC Judge in
Malabon.
 In 1999, he requested an audit of his sala conducted by the OCA. After such audit, the OCA
recommended that their report be considered as an administrative complaint against Judge Floro
which the Court adopted in a resolution that placed him under preventive suspension. The report
included misbehaviours and violations of Judge Floro on various Codes of Judicial Conduct.
 Second Case, is one of the subject matter on the first case. Judge Floro allegedly used/took
advantage of his moral ascendancy to settle and eventually dismiss a Criminal Case (frustrated
homicide) in the guise of settling the civil aspect of the case, by persuading the private
complainant and the accused to sign the settlement without presence of the trial prosecutor.
 The Third Case, concerns a resolution issued by Judge Floro on 11 May 1999 in Special
Proceeding Case No. 315-MN "In Re: Petition To Be Admitted A Citizen Of The Philippines,
Mary Ng Nei, Petitioner." The resolution disposed of the motions for voluntary inhibition of
Judge Floro and the reconsideration of the order denying the petition for naturalization filed by
petitioner in that case.

Issues:

WON Judge Floro be relieved of his position as Judge due to a medically disabling condition of the mind.

Ruling:

There is no indication that Judge Floro is anything but an honorable man. And in fact, the Court's
disposition of the 13 charges against him, they have not found him guilty of gross misconduct or acts of
corruption. However, the findings of psychosis by the mental health professionals assigned to his case
indicate gross deficiency in competence and independence.

Therefore, the Court is in agreement with the OCA that Judge Floro cannot remain as RTV Judge because
of the findings of mental impairment that renders him unfit to perform the functions of the office.
However, the Court and OCA is not qualified to conclude that the Judge is insane as in fact the
psychologist and psychiatrists in his case never said so.